I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts, John and Philip. Roberts is particularly scathing in his laser-point accuracy. His argument summarzied: The majority claimed that a decision needed to be made regarding habeas corpus to expedite the process for the detainees, but there’s no guarantee that whatever the court does would actually make the process faster.
In fact, it could even slow it down, which is something the majority would have realized if they really understood the process by which detainees could make their cases. What makes this particularly abhorrent to Roberts, whose judicial philosophy focuses on not making broad sweeping decisions that have bad consequences, is that the majority didn’t wait for the petitioners to exhaust all their possible options before hearing their case.
In other words, the whole problem is that the petitioners felt they were being denied their due process rights, and yet they’re trying to skip using what due process is afforded to them.
